Interviewers’ Responsiveness to Communication Errors within Organizational Suspect Interviews: The Impact of Error Orientation and Suspect Motives on Stress, Distraction, and Behaviour

Research on communication errors within suspect interviews is scarce and limited to the field of law enforcement. Therefore, this study examined the effects of error making, error framing, and presumptions about the suspect’s motive on interviewers’ stress, distraction, and behavioural responses, within an interview in an organizational setting. Using role-play, adults (N = 112), with no interviewing experience, questioned an employee suspected of stealing company property. Participants were provided with materials that unknowingly assigned them to a random condition, using a 2 (Error: factual, control) × 2 (Presumed motive: accidental, purposeful) between-subjects factorial design. The results show that factual error making did not affect interviewers’ levels of stress or distraction. Further, interviewers’ framing of errors and motive presumptions did not affect stress or distraction after erring. Lastly, stress, distraction, error frame, and motive presumptions were not associated with interviewers’ behavioural responses to errors. These findings provide early indications that there may be no effects of factual errors, error framing, and motive presumptions on interviewers’ feelings and behaviours in an organizational setting. Still, additional research is needed to answer new questions such as whether the findings also hold for other types of factual errors. Combining these insights can help identify tools for interviewers to efficaciously cope with communication errors during organizational suspect interviews. Keywords: suspect interviews; communication error management; error orientation; interviewer bias; insider threat; workplace investigation; stress; distraction; behavioural responses